x
Click to expand

ieatpaste

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:12/17/2009
Last Login:3/03/2015
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#11449
Highest Content Rank:#2381
Highest Comment Rank:#1859
Content Thumbs: 892 total,  1000 ,  108
Comment Thumbs: 2595 total,  3947 ,  1352
Content Level Progress: 90% (9/10)
Level 64 Content: FJ Cultist → Level 65 Content: FJ Cultist
Comment Level Progress: 19% (19/100)
Level 220 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 221 Comments: Mind Blower
Subscribers:6
Content Views:49771
Times Content Favorited:20 times
Total Comments Made:1151
FJ Points:2666
Favorite Tags: Blacksmith (2) | Knife (2) | Razor (2) | steel (2) | tool (2)

Funny Pictures

  • Views: 34071
    Thumbs Up 827 Thumbs Down 67 Total: +760
    Comments: 87
    Favorites: 17
    Uploaded: 11/06/14
    straight razor straight razor
  • Views: 6977
    Thumbs Up 89 Thumbs Down 14 Total: +75
    Comments: 9
    Favorites: 3
    Uploaded: 11/06/14
    small utility razor small utility razor
  • Views: 5408
    Thumbs Up 63 Thumbs Down 15 Total: +48
    Comments: 13
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 11/06/14
    die set die set
  • Views: 1285
    Thumbs Up 10 Thumbs Down 3 Total: +7
    Comments: 11
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 01/18/14
    Any machinist out there? Any machinist out there?
  • Views: 1006
    Thumbs Up 9 Thumbs Down 5 Total: +4
    Comments: 29
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 11/06/14
    my first knife my first knife
  • Views: 757
    Thumbs Up 2 Thumbs Down 4 Total: -2
    Comments: 0
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 10/28/14
    in case you haven't heard in case you haven't heard

latest user's comments

#44 - the bruins arent from montreal? jk 03/02/2015 on Wild Canadian Parties 0
#24 - for real 03/01/2015 on the unfortunate truth +2
#29 - george > the other cunts 03/01/2015 on better live up to my name 0
#705 - why have our names gotten less blue? 03/01/2015 on Name color strawpoll in... 0
#35 - the whole thing is full of water 03/01/2015 on Crash ice level 0
#41 - but dont question religion....... 02/28/2015 on Well shit 0
#34 - your comments make me cringe more than any cringe comp  [+] (23 new replies) 02/28/2015 on This almost happened 0
#39 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
Yep. You're definitely a woman.
User avatar #40 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
Yep youre definitely 13
#42 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
You got me. I'm in a basement wearing a fedora, and I've never touched a woman. I'm just bitter and mean from sexual frustration. I can't get any because I weigh 600lbs and am covered in sweat and Doritos dust. You got me. Feel better, pumpkin?
#44 - magicmatchsticks (02/28/2015) [-]
who else would argue like that

next time you want to pretend like your opinions actually matter and aren't just bait, try logging in.
#45 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
I don't have an account. What the hell difference does it make? What are you going to do? Thumb down my comment? Do you really think I have a problem saying this to people's faces? Get real.
User avatar #50 - magicmatchsticks (02/28/2015) [-]
>Do you really think I have a problem saying this to people's faces
yeah i do
that's why you're on the internet
instead of speaking to someone in real life

But on the offchance that you aren't actually a troll, let me take some time out of my night to explain exactly why exactly you're fucking retarded. First of all, there's your ridiculous style of debate which makes you sound like an enraged, pre-pubescent boy. Unfortunately, just because someone argues poorly isn't enough to discredit them of its own merit.
"Yeah, the same people that run the Post Office and Amtrak are going to run the internet."
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, so shut the fuck up. Imagine this, if you can- PSE&G decides one day that they aren't going to give poor people power because they aren't a big enough market, and instead are going to charge a premium to middle class and rich people because they think it would make them more profit. They can't do this because they're a utility- the same as Comcast has now been ruled. The government does not own or run power companies, you stupid twat. Literally nothing will change as a result of this ruling for most people- you might notice a slight increase in speed for some services like netflix or HBO Go because the cable companies will no longer be able to slow down your service when you access rival companies' sites. The FCC voting the other way would be the worst thing to ever happen to the freedom of speech since 1969.

tl;dr: there is no tl;dr. You can choose not to read, but then don't bother responding.
#55 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
...and if PS&G did that it would create a new market, and some enterprising people would figure out a way to get energy to poorer areas for less, thus increasing their margin by picking up customers PS&G didn't want. There would also be people who would come up with more and more efficient appliances that cost less. Thus again, increasing their margin. There are probably thousands of ideas that would be tried by the free market to solve this problem. I can't think of them all because it's the ingenuity of millions that would be tried and tested. Most would fail until a solution was discovered and the creator would reap the benefit.

Then, the over charged market would want to be serviced by the new companies and the whole market would become more efficient while delivering a better service at a better price. Then PS&G would fail for their short sightedness, leaving themselves open to competition by completely ignoring an entire sector of the market, and their inability/unwillingness to innovate. This is what happened with land-line phone companies in the early 2000's. I remember the glee I had when I told Bell South to go f*ck themselves and that I was using my cell phone from now on.

Government regulation on things such as utility companies makes innovation SLOWER. GOVT killed the market that would have fueled the entrepreneurial drive to service it. That's why we need MORE govt to inefficiently "invest" in things like wind and solar now. There's almost no incentive for the private sector to do it due to govt regulations keeping the cost of coal and oil-based energy artificially low. That drive would have created a better product at a cheaper price FASTER than any govt program ever could hope to.

It's so telling what type of brainwashed lemming I'm dealing with when you don't realize LACK OF REGULATION is the thing that has made the internet so great thus far. You think the FCC is going to make the internet better? LOL! You don't think it will be abused the way the IRS, GAO, DOJ, DOD, and etc abuse their power? You don't think the FCC will create a fiefdom of cronyism where they use their power to wield influence, punish enemies, and reward friends? Comcast didn't lose anything today. You did. I did. The public lost any ability they had to influence the future of the internet through market pressure--you know, hundreds of million of individuals deciding what they want and voting with their wallets on a million different things a million times a day vs 5 bureaucrats deciding what the internet will be like.

You are so naive it's sad. Voting the other way would crush free speech? Get up off your fainting couch, Mabel. Unclutch your pearls. Voting the other way MAY have created temporary discomfort, but that discomfort (in the form of bundling--not limiting speech!) would create new markets where new ISPs would find new ways of getting internet to the public with higher speeds and cheaper prices without limits on content. IDIOTS LIKE YOU just assured that that is further and further away.

So yes, the same people who run the Post office and Amtrak will run the internet. That's EXACTLY what's happening, and they will run it just as bad as any other govt organization. Innovation will be stifled, you will pay more, and get less. Somehow, regardless of all the evidence, idiots like you never met a government program or regulation you didn't like. We would have had great solutions to energy problems decades ago if it wasn't for government involvement. Now, we have ONE thing that works BECAUSE IT'S ACTUALLY FREE, and you champion it's end. You assume the internet is in its final form, and you just want the government to make sure nothing changes BY FORCE. Good thing we never innovated past the Model T, huh genius?

F*ck you. I have no problem saying this to anyone's face. If you have a conversation on the internet it's only because you don't have the same conversations in real life?! F*ck off, moron.
User avatar #67 - zendir (02/28/2015) [-]
I dont get why a year ago everyone was against this now they are happy to have it.
#69 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
Because they changed the name to "net neutrality" I guess? It's like the estate tax. Most people don't mind since most just say, "Hey. I'm not rich enough to have an 'estate.' It doesn't have anything to do with me." Then the kids find out after grandpa dies that he didn't prepare for the government's cut of his "estate." "Net neutrality" sounds good. Know what I mean?
User avatar #70 - zendir (02/28/2015) [-]
I really hate what liberals have done to this country, and no one sees that the media plays them all like tiny violins, well fiddles would be better since most officials see the common person too unintelligent to live life the way we want.
#76 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
Exactly.
User avatar #48 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
Trolls do much better with accounts. brands get recognized.
#52 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
I don't give a sh*t about a "brand." I rarely comment, but sometimes I feel compelled to by idiots agreeing to something stupid in large numbers. Apparently, the consensus of the under 30 internet crowd is that this is great news! I had to at least try to stop the retarded celebration on one thread. I had to at least do something to point out to you idiots that you're being played. Rather than simply give you, especially you, new information, I had to try to first stop the smug-self-satisfied-liberal circle-jerk. Didn't I just argue with you about women with mohawks? You seem to say dumb sh*t a lot. Consider my "trolling" a public service. You might learn something.
User avatar #64 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
You were doing so good when you actually had points to make in the post above this one, you almost convinced me then you went back to being childish.
#65 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
You want to talk substance, talk substance. I explained my position above because I was asked to. You play on emotions and talk about how you feel like you'd rather be a likeable fool than like me. You still haven't made one argument against me, and you haven't answered my question. Didn't I talk to you about girls with mohawks?
User avatar #68 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
Yes we did. You made your point, showed me why I was wrong and i eventually and heres my favorite part agreed with you. We left as freinds. I learned something and secretly hoped you did too. Treat the youngsters like children and they wont respect you. I like to be wrong, it means i get to learn But i also believe in looking at something from both sides so I can learn. Ill tear apart something i love to see why it can be a problem and defend something i hate to see why it may work. i will admit im young and stupid, kinda how it works but one day i wont be and id rather my opinions be well informed. I apologize for the bad grammar im on my phone.
#77 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
PS I definitely learned something this time. I won't make the same mistake again.
#75 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
I'm a dick sometimes. I apologize sincerely--no sarcasm. I didn't recognize your name until later in the comment thread. Regardless, I started off both interactions with you by being a dick. The first time we went back and forth you started by saying "women who buck the system should be celebrated." This time, you started by saying "the FCC has our back." If you know me (You don't so I shouldn't react like you do. That's my problem--not yours.), you would know that making excuses for bad behavior from women or the government are the two things most likely to make my blood boil. Even when I realized it was you and remembered you being fair to me last time, I still dug in. I'm sorry. You are really fair and decent. I'm wrong to bully you or push you around or whatever you want to call it. Apparently, we disagree on some things, and perhaps you are "young and stupid," but that's no excuse for me to act the way I have to you...TWICE! I'm old enough to know better. Really, sometimes I'm just such a dick. I'm sorry. You're nice and fair and reasonable and I'm a jerk. I'm so sorry. For what it's worth, I really think net neutrality is a bad idea, but I like you. If I run into you again, I promise I'll be nice.
User avatar #78 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
Im not worried about it i forgive easy and believe in freedoms before anything. Now tell me why its a bad thing.
#86 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
PS I know I wrote a lot, but I have one more example. What if during the dial-up years someone developed high-speed internet. The only problem was that the cost of developing the technology and laying new high-speed cable was pretty high. Therefore, to start the business and give people better internet, they'd have to charge a premium for a while. Well, if there was a law saying that companies couldn't charge a premium even for a better product...well...the question is: Would you be okay with dial-up for the foreseeable future just so there wasn't different levels of service for different prices?

In fact, under net neutrality, the government would have to come up with faster internet and then share the technology with everyone equally (sort of like what's happening with solar because the government killed the private market for alternative energy) because all internet has to be the same speed, right? Of course the government would be motivated to improve internet speed to increase commerce, tax revenue, and etc., but how long do you think it would take for politicians to do the studies and fund the projects and eventually come up with high-speed internet. Well, that's what we have now. What comes after high-speed? Who knows, but we'll be stuck with our version of "dial-up" for quite some time.
#83 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
PS I could literally talk about this for an hour. It's a complex subject, and it takes a lot to explain it. I'd be willing to email back and forth if you want to talk more. Pen pal or some sh*t. Or talk some other way. Your nice. I like you. Let me know.
#81 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
Well, first re-read comment #55 and replace PS&G with ISP's. If ISPs started this bundling garbage millions of people would be upset and want a better choice, right? It's just like the poor people in the above comment. Someone would see this as an enormous opportunity (net neutrality is removing this temporary discomfort consequently removing the market forces consequently removing the opportunity for a brilliant entrepreneur to become the next Mark Zuckerberg by taking the internet to the next level), and maybe they'd develop high-altitude terrestrial (inEarth's atmosphere) satellite type things to deliver internet signals or something. That would give people a choice in addition to internet through physical cables or space satellites. Plus all the related innovations such as better solar cells or more weather resistant flight material that would also benefit the world. That's just one example off the top of my head, and it's probably bad. I'm not brilliant. Some smart person might think of a way of getting high-speed internet to everyone at a reasonable price that people can't even imagine yet. If the internet was left alone, could you really imagine what it would be like in 50 or 100 years. It's stuff we can't fathom yet. Current internet is the Model T.

Ask yourself why low cost Hulu and Netflix exist? Hint: it rhymes with high-cost shmable shmundling. Why are people "cutting the cord," and what are they going to instead? These are market forces. Telephone long distance had a series of crappy choices, but cell phones came along. The high cost
temporary_ monopoly phone carriers had created dissatisfied customers. Those customers wanted another choice. Now nation-wide calling is basically standard. This is better than what we had before and years ahead of what any government program could do.

The thing is, if market forces changed phones for the better and TV for the better and movies for the better, why does everyone celebrate when the government steps in and removes market forces from the internet? What's better: hundreds of millions of people making hundreds of millions of decisions a day about what they want and making hundreds of millions of votes with their wallets each day OR five bureaucrats deciding that the internet is as good as it can get and it should stay the same.

Yes, the internet will continue pretty much as it exist now. You won't notice much of a difference, but the motivation to innovate is gone. Consequently, internet will probably be very similar in 10 years. Think of how fast things have changed in just the last ten years. Apple was a response to a buggy Microsoft giant that people wanted a solution to. Netflix vs Blockbuster. Hulu vs your cable company. These all happened in about the last five years in response to market forces. People did the work to developer the technology to make high res streaming normal. Remember dial-up? It was painful, and now it's gone.

I'm not upset that the internet is going to stay the way it is. I'm upset that the discomfort that is inflicted on customers by a large arrogant company such as Comcast from time to time are now gone. These were the motivations to move markets to demand change--not by force, but with their wallets! I'm upset because the next Zuckerberg or the next Comcast won't have a customer for their innovations because they're not allowed to sell anything "better," get it? You can't sell anything worse than what we have currently, but you can't sell anything better either. In addition to the guaranteed cronyism and corruption this will cause, do you really want to live in a country where the internet and devices that use the internet are basically the same 20 years from now.
User avatar #85 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
So innovation is only possible in private hands. Makes sense to me. from what i know governments want stable environments. That kills innovation. Interesting.
#2 - this is one town over from me, i played pickup football with t… 02/28/2015 on She's a Monster 0
#31 - i dont agree or disagree, if you argued like that in real life…  [+] (30 new replies) 02/28/2015 on This almost happened +2
#33 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
...and that would be the last thing you did. You must be a woman, right? It's usually women that say things like that since they're used to not having consequences for their actions. Regardless, after someone says "Fcc came through for us" I know they are too stupid to speak with rationally. They deserve relentless ridicule without exception.
User avatar #35 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
Id rather be around a kind fool than an asshole intellect any day. Especially one that willingly lowers thereself in an attempt to ridicule another. You'd be saying the same shit if the fcc voted the other way. You're opinion here is worthless
User avatar #56 - ReeferTrees (02/28/2015) [-]
a Kind Fool is called Naive, being Naive gets not only you but those around you in danger.

By saying this you prove yourself to be an irrational person who does not think properly.

Everything Anon is saying is correct by the way, and you are indeed idiots for not realizing this because believing anything else proves that you HAVE NOT been paying attention to anything other than petty blogs on some pathetic social website.

Please do some actual research.
User avatar #62 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
cite your sources oh wise one
#58 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
Thanks, friend. I don't know if I got through to you so-to-speak, or perhaps you were already informed. I think you already were informed. Either way, I hope that with you writing this comment maybe some people will think I might not be totally crazy and start to wake-up a little or at least question this. Regardless, one of us, one oF US, ONE OF US..
#38 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
I'd be saying the same sh*t if the FCC voted the other way? Really? Don't worry. You've got the "fool" thing down. I don't think you have to worry about the intellect part.
User avatar #34 - ieatpaste (02/28/2015) [-]
your comments make me cringe more than any cringe comp
#39 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
Yep. You're definitely a woman.
User avatar #40 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
Yep youre definitely 13
#42 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
You got me. I'm in a basement wearing a fedora, and I've never touched a woman. I'm just bitter and mean from sexual frustration. I can't get any because I weigh 600lbs and am covered in sweat and Doritos dust. You got me. Feel better, pumpkin?
#44 - magicmatchsticks (02/28/2015) [-]
who else would argue like that

next time you want to pretend like your opinions actually matter and aren't just bait, try logging in.
#45 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
I don't have an account. What the hell difference does it make? What are you going to do? Thumb down my comment? Do you really think I have a problem saying this to people's faces? Get real.
User avatar #50 - magicmatchsticks (02/28/2015) [-]
>Do you really think I have a problem saying this to people's faces
yeah i do
that's why you're on the internet
instead of speaking to someone in real life

But on the offchance that you aren't actually a troll, let me take some time out of my night to explain exactly why exactly you're fucking retarded. First of all, there's your ridiculous style of debate which makes you sound like an enraged, pre-pubescent boy. Unfortunately, just because someone argues poorly isn't enough to discredit them of its own merit.
"Yeah, the same people that run the Post Office and Amtrak are going to run the internet."
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, so shut the fuck up. Imagine this, if you can- PSE&G decides one day that they aren't going to give poor people power because they aren't a big enough market, and instead are going to charge a premium to middle class and rich people because they think it would make them more profit. They can't do this because they're a utility- the same as Comcast has now been ruled. The government does not own or run power companies, you stupid twat. Literally nothing will change as a result of this ruling for most people- you might notice a slight increase in speed for some services like netflix or HBO Go because the cable companies will no longer be able to slow down your service when you access rival companies' sites. The FCC voting the other way would be the worst thing to ever happen to the freedom of speech since 1969.

tl;dr: there is no tl;dr. You can choose not to read, but then don't bother responding.
#55 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
...and if PS&G did that it would create a new market, and some enterprising people would figure out a way to get energy to poorer areas for less, thus increasing their margin by picking up customers PS&G didn't want. There would also be people who would come up with more and more efficient appliances that cost less. Thus again, increasing their margin. There are probably thousands of ideas that would be tried by the free market to solve this problem. I can't think of them all because it's the ingenuity of millions that would be tried and tested. Most would fail until a solution was discovered and the creator would reap the benefit.

Then, the over charged market would want to be serviced by the new companies and the whole market would become more efficient while delivering a better service at a better price. Then PS&G would fail for their short sightedness, leaving themselves open to competition by completely ignoring an entire sector of the market, and their inability/unwillingness to innovate. This is what happened with land-line phone companies in the early 2000's. I remember the glee I had when I told Bell South to go f*ck themselves and that I was using my cell phone from now on.

Government regulation on things such as utility companies makes innovation SLOWER. GOVT killed the market that would have fueled the entrepreneurial drive to service it. That's why we need MORE govt to inefficiently "invest" in things like wind and solar now. There's almost no incentive for the private sector to do it due to govt regulations keeping the cost of coal and oil-based energy artificially low. That drive would have created a better product at a cheaper price FASTER than any govt program ever could hope to.

It's so telling what type of brainwashed lemming I'm dealing with when you don't realize LACK OF REGULATION is the thing that has made the internet so great thus far. You think the FCC is going to make the internet better? LOL! You don't think it will be abused the way the IRS, GAO, DOJ, DOD, and etc abuse their power? You don't think the FCC will create a fiefdom of cronyism where they use their power to wield influence, punish enemies, and reward friends? Comcast didn't lose anything today. You did. I did. The public lost any ability they had to influence the future of the internet through market pressure--you know, hundreds of million of individuals deciding what they want and voting with their wallets on a million different things a million times a day vs 5 bureaucrats deciding what the internet will be like.

You are so naive it's sad. Voting the other way would crush free speech? Get up off your fainting couch, Mabel. Unclutch your pearls. Voting the other way MAY have created temporary discomfort, but that discomfort (in the form of bundling--not limiting speech!) would create new markets where new ISPs would find new ways of getting internet to the public with higher speeds and cheaper prices without limits on content. IDIOTS LIKE YOU just assured that that is further and further away.

So yes, the same people who run the Post office and Amtrak will run the internet. That's EXACTLY what's happening, and they will run it just as bad as any other govt organization. Innovation will be stifled, you will pay more, and get less. Somehow, regardless of all the evidence, idiots like you never met a government program or regulation you didn't like. We would have had great solutions to energy problems decades ago if it wasn't for government involvement. Now, we have ONE thing that works BECAUSE IT'S ACTUALLY FREE, and you champion it's end. You assume the internet is in its final form, and you just want the government to make sure nothing changes BY FORCE. Good thing we never innovated past the Model T, huh genius?

F*ck you. I have no problem saying this to anyone's face. If you have a conversation on the internet it's only because you don't have the same conversations in real life?! F*ck off, moron.
User avatar #67 - zendir (02/28/2015) [-]
I dont get why a year ago everyone was against this now they are happy to have it.
#69 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
Because they changed the name to "net neutrality" I guess? It's like the estate tax. Most people don't mind since most just say, "Hey. I'm not rich enough to have an 'estate.' It doesn't have anything to do with me." Then the kids find out after grandpa dies that he didn't prepare for the government's cut of his "estate." "Net neutrality" sounds good. Know what I mean?
User avatar #70 - zendir (02/28/2015) [-]
I really hate what liberals have done to this country, and no one sees that the media plays them all like tiny violins, well fiddles would be better since most officials see the common person too unintelligent to live life the way we want.
#76 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
Exactly.
User avatar #48 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
Trolls do much better with accounts. brands get recognized.
#52 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
I don't give a sh*t about a "brand." I rarely comment, but sometimes I feel compelled to by idiots agreeing to something stupid in large numbers. Apparently, the consensus of the under 30 internet crowd is that this is great news! I had to at least try to stop the retarded celebration on one thread. I had to at least do something to point out to you idiots that you're being played. Rather than simply give you, especially you, new information, I had to try to first stop the smug-self-satisfied-liberal circle-jerk. Didn't I just argue with you about women with mohawks? You seem to say dumb sh*t a lot. Consider my "trolling" a public service. You might learn something.
User avatar #64 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
You were doing so good when you actually had points to make in the post above this one, you almost convinced me then you went back to being childish.
#65 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
You want to talk substance, talk substance. I explained my position above because I was asked to. You play on emotions and talk about how you feel like you'd rather be a likeable fool than like me. You still haven't made one argument against me, and you haven't answered my question. Didn't I talk to you about girls with mohawks?
User avatar #68 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
Yes we did. You made your point, showed me why I was wrong and i eventually and heres my favorite part agreed with you. We left as freinds. I learned something and secretly hoped you did too. Treat the youngsters like children and they wont respect you. I like to be wrong, it means i get to learn But i also believe in looking at something from both sides so I can learn. Ill tear apart something i love to see why it can be a problem and defend something i hate to see why it may work. i will admit im young and stupid, kinda how it works but one day i wont be and id rather my opinions be well informed. I apologize for the bad grammar im on my phone.
#77 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
PS I definitely learned something this time. I won't make the same mistake again.
#75 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
I'm a dick sometimes. I apologize sincerely--no sarcasm. I didn't recognize your name until later in the comment thread. Regardless, I started off both interactions with you by being a dick. The first time we went back and forth you started by saying "women who buck the system should be celebrated." This time, you started by saying "the FCC has our back." If you know me (You don't so I shouldn't react like you do. That's my problem--not yours.), you would know that making excuses for bad behavior from women or the government are the two things most likely to make my blood boil. Even when I realized it was you and remembered you being fair to me last time, I still dug in. I'm sorry. You are really fair and decent. I'm wrong to bully you or push you around or whatever you want to call it. Apparently, we disagree on some things, and perhaps you are "young and stupid," but that's no excuse for me to act the way I have to you...TWICE! I'm old enough to know better. Really, sometimes I'm just such a dick. I'm sorry. You're nice and fair and reasonable and I'm a jerk. I'm so sorry. For what it's worth, I really think net neutrality is a bad idea, but I like you. If I run into you again, I promise I'll be nice.
User avatar #78 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
Im not worried about it i forgive easy and believe in freedoms before anything. Now tell me why its a bad thing.
#86 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
PS I know I wrote a lot, but I have one more example. What if during the dial-up years someone developed high-speed internet. The only problem was that the cost of developing the technology and laying new high-speed cable was pretty high. Therefore, to start the business and give people better internet, they'd have to charge a premium for a while. Well, if there was a law saying that companies couldn't charge a premium even for a better product...well...the question is: Would you be okay with dial-up for the foreseeable future just so there wasn't different levels of service for different prices?

In fact, under net neutrality, the government would have to come up with faster internet and then share the technology with everyone equally (sort of like what's happening with solar because the government killed the private market for alternative energy) because all internet has to be the same speed, right? Of course the government would be motivated to improve internet speed to increase commerce, tax revenue, and etc., but how long do you think it would take for politicians to do the studies and fund the projects and eventually come up with high-speed internet. Well, that's what we have now. What comes after high-speed? Who knows, but we'll be stuck with our version of "dial-up" for quite some time.
#83 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
PS I could literally talk about this for an hour. It's a complex subject, and it takes a lot to explain it. I'd be willing to email back and forth if you want to talk more. Pen pal or some sh*t. Or talk some other way. Your nice. I like you. Let me know.
#81 - anonexplains (02/28/2015) [-]
Well, first re-read comment #55 and replace PS&G with ISP's. If ISPs started this bundling garbage millions of people would be upset and want a better choice, right? It's just like the poor people in the above comment. Someone would see this as an enormous opportunity (net neutrality is removing this temporary discomfort consequently removing the market forces consequently removing the opportunity for a brilliant entrepreneur to become the next Mark Zuckerberg by taking the internet to the next level), and maybe they'd develop high-altitude terrestrial (inEarth's atmosphere) satellite type things to deliver internet signals or something. That would give people a choice in addition to internet through physical cables or space satellites. Plus all the related innovations such as better solar cells or more weather resistant flight material that would also benefit the world. That's just one example off the top of my head, and it's probably bad. I'm not brilliant. Some smart person might think of a way of getting high-speed internet to everyone at a reasonable price that people can't even imagine yet. If the internet was left alone, could you really imagine what it would be like in 50 or 100 years. It's stuff we can't fathom yet. Current internet is the Model T.

Ask yourself why low cost Hulu and Netflix exist? Hint: it rhymes with high-cost shmable shmundling. Why are people "cutting the cord," and what are they going to instead? These are market forces. Telephone long distance had a series of crappy choices, but cell phones came along. The high cost
temporary_ monopoly phone carriers had created dissatisfied customers. Those customers wanted another choice. Now nation-wide calling is basically standard. This is better than what we had before and years ahead of what any government program could do.

The thing is, if market forces changed phones for the better and TV for the better and movies for the better, why does everyone celebrate when the government steps in and removes market forces from the internet? What's better: hundreds of millions of people making hundreds of millions of decisions a day about what they want and making hundreds of millions of votes with their wallets each day OR five bureaucrats deciding that the internet is as good as it can get and it should stay the same.

Yes, the internet will continue pretty much as it exist now. You won't notice much of a difference, but the motivation to innovate is gone. Consequently, internet will probably be very similar in 10 years. Think of how fast things have changed in just the last ten years. Apple was a response to a buggy Microsoft giant that people wanted a solution to. Netflix vs Blockbuster. Hulu vs your cable company. These all happened in about the last five years in response to market forces. People did the work to developer the technology to make high res streaming normal. Remember dial-up? It was painful, and now it's gone.

I'm not upset that the internet is going to stay the way it is. I'm upset that the discomfort that is inflicted on customers by a large arrogant company such as Comcast from time to time are now gone. These were the motivations to move markets to demand change--not by force, but with their wallets! I'm upset because the next Zuckerberg or the next Comcast won't have a customer for their innovations because they're not allowed to sell anything "better," get it? You can't sell anything worse than what we have currently, but you can't sell anything better either. In addition to the guaranteed cronyism and corruption this will cause, do you really want to live in a country where the internet and devices that use the internet are basically the same 20 years from now.
User avatar #85 - theshinypen (02/28/2015) [-]
So innovation is only possible in private hands. Makes sense to me. from what i know governments want stable environments. That kills innovation. Interesting.
#217 - Picture 02/28/2015 on Tags +1

user's channels

Join Subscribe makers

items

Total unique items point value: 1572 / Total items point value: 2204
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #6 - darkjustifier (09/11/2014) [-]
alpha is blocking me and I really did want to reply to your comment, I can agree I'm most likely wrong about the losing fat thing I just have a hard time believing it because I work my ass to the grindstone everyday and the most that happened was going from fat to pudgy and I don't go any lower then pudge from that I believed there were certain body types who aren't supposed to lose that pudge but that doesn't mean hey're unhealthy it's just the way their body works
User avatar #4 - abstractpink (06/30/2014) [-]
Hey
User avatar #5 to #4 - ieatpaste (07/01/2014) [-]
sup?
User avatar #1 - tjsoup (03/09/2014) [-]
Hey
User avatar #2 to #1 - ieatpaste (03/09/2014) [-]
digging your trippyjunk post
User avatar #3 to #2 - tjsoup (03/09/2014) [-]
thanks!
welcome to the board hope you enjoy it
 Friends (0)